Recommended Posts

Ranking Member of the House Intelligence Committee Adam Schiff (D-CA) speaks after U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions attended a closed door interview with the House Intelligence Committee on Capitol in Washington, U.S., November 30, 2017. REUTERS/Joshua Roberts

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Testimony to the U.S. Congress by the head of a political research firm indicates that the Trump Organization's sales of properties to Russian nationals may have involved money-laundering, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee said on Thursday.

The panel released the transcript of a Nov. 14 closed-door interview with Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson, whose firm hired a former British spy to research then-presidential candidate Donald Trump's campaign ties to Russians and produced a dossier.

Another Democrat on the Republican-controlled committee, Representative Jim Hines, sought to temper Schiff's comment, telling CNN that Simpson "did not provide evidence and I think that's an important point. He made allegations."

The House of Representatives panel is conducting one of the three congressional investigations into possible collusion between Trump's 2016 campaign and Russia. Special Counsel Robert Mueller is leading a separate probe by the U.S. Justice Department. Moscow denies the conclusions of U.S. intelligence agencies that it interfered in the 2016 election to help Trump and Trump denies any collusion.

In his testimony, Simpson said that his firm closely examined sales of condominiums in Trump properties in New York, Miami, Panama City and Toronto.

"There were a lot of real estate deals where you couldn't really tell who was buying the property," Simpson said. "And sometimes properties would be bought and sold, and they would be bought for one price and sold for a loss shortly thereafter, and it really didn't make sense to us."

"We saw patterns of buying and selling that we thought were suggestive of money-laundering," he continued.

Alan Garten, the Trump Organization’s chief counsel, said that the deals Simpson referenced primarily involve properties to which Trump licensed his name, rather than owning, developing or selling them.

"These accusations are completely reckless and unsubstantiated for a multitude of reasons," Garten said.

"These issues have nothing to do with the scope of the investigation" by the House intelligence committee, Garten said in a phone interview. "But it’s not surprising the minority (Democrats) would focus on this given they’ve found absolutely no evidence of collusion."

Simpson, under questioning by Rep. Jackie Speier, California Democrat, also said that Russia’s operation to influence U.S. politics included attempts to infiltrate the National Rifle Association (NRA) and other conservative organizations, such as groups promoting independence for the states of Texas and California.

“They seem to have made a very concerted effort to get in with the NRA,” Simpson said, according to the transcript.

The NRA did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Earlier this month, Democratic U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein released Simpson's testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, where she is the ranking Democrat. The panel's Republican chairman, Chuck Grassley, had not agreed to the release.

Fusion GPS, based in Washington, hired former British spy Christopher Steele to investigate Trump's business dealings with Russia. It first investigated Trump on behalf of the conservative Washington Free Beacon online news site and then for the Democratic National Committee.

Trump has repeatedly criticized the dossier, which was based on Steele's investigation, calling it "bogus" and "discredited and phony."

Some Republicans critical of Mueller's investigation have said that Steele's dossier triggered the initial probe by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

They have raised questions about whether the FBI may have relied on the Steele document to improperly obtain surveillance warrants to spy on Trump's campaign associates.

The testimony by Fusion GPS's Simpson before the Senate Judiciary Committee last August contradicted those claims.

Ever since Feinstein released the testimony on Jan. 9, House Intelligence Committee Democrats have been asking that Simpson's testimony to their committee be made public.

(Additional reporting by John Walcott; Editing by Jonathan Oatis and Grant McCool)

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

A friend of mine just sold his house near Seattle to a Chinese national for $1.4 million. The money arrived from nowhere the day before closing. Total black box as far as the money's provenance was concerned. Almost every sale to Chinese or Russians is like that I'm told by my R.E. broker. Not just money laundering but tax evasion and currency control evasion as well, for the foreign national that is. It is not a crime for a seller to receive these funds if they are not a part of the conspiracy to launder money/ evade taxes/ avoid currency controls.

I'm pretty sure a guy who bought a piece of land from us in Thailand through a corporation was laundering money but it didn't have anything to do with me and he paid the exact asking price so why would I question where he got his money from?

None of that is to say that the Trump Organization wasn't involved in money laundering but instead, to point out that receiving money (unknowingly) from people who engage in money laundering is not in itself a crime.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

A friend of mine just sold his house near Seattle to a Chinese national for $1.4 million. The money arrived from nowhere the day before closing. Total black box as far as the money's provenance was concerned. Almost every sale to Chinese or Russians is like that I'm told by my R.E. broker. Not just money laundering but tax evasion and currency control evasion as well, for the foreign national that is. It is not a crime for a seller to receive these funds if they are not a part of the conspiracy to launder money/ evade taxes/ avoid currency controls.

I'm pretty sure a guy who bought a piece of land from us in Thailand through a corporation was laundering money but it didn't have anything to do with me and he paid the exact asking price so why would I question where he got his money from?

None of that is to say that the Trump Organization wasn't involved in money laundering but instead, to point out that receiving money (unknowingly) from people who engage in money laundering is not in itself a crime.

Hmmmm...from the article:

["There were a lot of real estate deals where you couldn't really tell who was buying the property," Simpson said. "And sometimes properties would be bought and sold, and they would be bought for one price and sold for a loss shortly thereafter, and it really didn't make sense to us."

"We saw patterns of buying and selling that we thought were suggestive of money-laundering," he continued.]

There are shady real estate deals and then there's flatout money laundering. What Trump and his criminal enterprise have been engaged in appears to be the latter. Mueller will get to the bottom of this...if he hasn't already. Money laundering has been criminalized in the United States since the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986. All I can say to Trump is "You can run, but you can't hide."

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

["There were a lot of real estate deals where you couldn't really tell who was buying the property," Simpson said. "And sometimes properties would be bought and sold, and they would be bought for one price and sold for a loss shortly thereafter, and it really didn't make sense to us."

"We saw patterns of buying and selling that we thought were suggestive of money-laundering," he continued.]

There are shady real estate deals and then there's flatout money laundering. What Trump and his criminal enterprise have been engaged in appears to be the latter. Mueller will get to the bottom of this...if he hasn't already. Money laundering has been criminalized in the United States since the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986. All I can say to Trump is "You can run, but you can't hide."

I have no doubt if there's something to find that Mueller' investigation will find it. I hope the Trump supporters will be accepting of the Special Counsel's recommendations.

Additionally, I have no doubt that if there is nothing of significance to find the Special Counsel will not recommend charges to be filed. If that is the case I hope the anti Trump coalition will be accepting of the Special Counsel's recommendations.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I have no doubt if there's something to find that Mueller' investigation will find it. I hope the Trump supporters will be accepting of the Special Counsel's recommendations.

Additionally, I have no doubt that if there is nothing of significance to find the Special Counsel will not recommend charges to be filed. If that is the case I hope the anti Trump coalition will be accepting of the Special Counsel's recommendations.

I really like this post. But not reslistic.

This being an American issue it doesnot matter what the out come is some people will be up in arms about the outcome and never let it be. .

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I have no doubt if there's something to find that Mueller' investigation will find it. I hope the Trump supporters will be accepting of the Special Counsel's recommendations.

Additionally, I have no doubt that if there is nothing of significance to find the Special Counsel will not recommend charges to be filed. If that is the case I hope the anti Trump coalition will be accepting of the Special Counsel's recommendations.

I have no problem accepting the Special Counsel's recommendations. But it won't be that simple--depends on his findings. If, say, it's clearcut that he found irrefutable evidence of wrongdoing (whether it's collusion, obstruction, money laundering...whatever), yet, the GOP Congress does absolutely nothing, then the political war will escalate. If Trump is completely innocent, then this whole Russia matter should go away...and rightfully so. But make no mistake, Trump will still not be loved by the majority of Americans. Especially when he keeps making stupid and/or racist comments...among other things.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I have no problem accepting the Special Counsel's recommendations. But it won't be that simple--depends on his findings. If, say, it's clearcut that he found irrefutable evidence of wrongdoing (whether it's collusion, obstruction, money laundering...whatever), yet, the GOP Congress does absolutely nothing, then the political war will escalate. If Trump is completely innocent, then this whole Russia matter should go away...and rightfully so. But make no mistake, Trump will still not be loved by the majority of Americans. Especially when he keeps making stupid and/or racist comments...among other things.

Why would anyone need to love the president? I haven't loved any of them, but I've accepted them all.

I think things started to head south in that regard when it was important to know what kind of underwear they wore, or if they were the kind of person you'd want to have a beer with.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

["There were a lot of real estate deals where you couldn't really tell who was buying the property," Simpson said. "And sometimes properties would be bought and sold, and they would be bought for one price and sold for a loss shortly thereafter, and it really didn't make sense to us."

"We saw patterns of buying and selling that we thought were suggestive of money-laundering," he continued.]

There are shady real estate deals and then there's flatout money laundering. What Trump and his criminal enterprise have been engaged in appears to be the latter. Mueller will get to the bottom of this...if he hasn't already. Money laundering has been criminalized in the United States since the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986. All I can say to Trump is "You can run, but you can't hide."

A real Democrat in heart and kidneys, or just a determined Trump hater, what it will be?

Seems you missed an important line just below what you like to quote

2 hours ago, webfact said:

"These accusations are completely reckless and unsubstantiated for a multitude of reasons," Garten said.

"These issues have nothing to do with the scope of the investigation" by the House intelligence committee, Garten said in a phone interview. "But it’s not surprising the minority (Democrats) would focus on this given they’ve found absolutely no evidence of collusion."

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

A real Democrat in heart and kidneys, or just a determined Trump hater, what it will be?

Seems you missed an important line just below what you like to quote

You included quotes from a guy named Garten...who would be? It's amazing that I have to explain this to you, but the defendant's lawyer will typically (i.e., nearly always) plead for his client, regardless of overwhelming evidence.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

You included quotes from a guy named Garten...who would be? It's amazing that I have to explain this to you, but the defendant's lawyer will typically (i.e., nearly always) plead for his client, regardless of overwhelming evidence.

Even your own mates are not so sure about this, so Garten seems to have a valid point.

2 hours ago, webfact said:

Another Democrat on the Republican-controlled committee, Representative Jim Hines, sought to temper Schiff's comment, telling CNN that Simpson "did not provide evidence and I think that's an important point. He made allegations."

Link to post

Share on other sites

A friend of mine just sold his house near Seattle to a Chinese national for $1.4 million. The money arrived from nowhere the day before closing. Total black box as far as the money's provenance was concerned. Almost every sale to Chinese or Russians is like that I'm told by my R.E. broker. Not just money laundering but tax evasion and currency control evasion as well, for the foreign national that is. It is not a crime for a seller to receive these funds if they are not a part of the conspiracy to launder money/ evade taxes/ avoid currency controls.

I'm pretty sure a guy who bought a piece of land from us in Thailand through a corporation was laundering money but it didn't have anything to do with me and he paid the exact asking price so why would I question where he got his money from?

None of that is to say that the Trump Organization wasn't involved in money laundering but instead, to point out that receiving money (unknowingly) from people who engage in money laundering is not in itself a crime.

Trump has a long standing track record of inappropriate financial dealings, including with Russians via banks identified for money laundering in places such as Cyrus.

Years ago he was identified by Australian Federal Police having financial dealings with the US mafia as outlined below.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

So we have a closed door session of a congressional investigation hearing. The full transcript is released to give the appearance of full disclosure, which I suppose is better than having continuous "leaks" out of Mueller office.

Dems pounce upon a salacious morsel of conjecture and their willing accomplices in the media are all too happy to oblige. In other words, Dems and the media are slinging political mud at the wall, which has no credibility. It loses even more considering the source is a private entity we know was hired to run a political hatchet job on Trump.

I don't feel sorry for Trump at all though. This is right up his street. But I also don't want to hear Dem/Lefties whining about Trump turning America into a Banana Republic when they themselves are driving the banana boat.